@RKBower1 1/ Acknowledging that you're changing the subject (again...a trait of yours) & dodging my question by posing a tangential one, I'll reply.
Just take these two utterances at face value. You seem to think HC is some over the top egregious error. I don't know the context of her
Just take these two utterances at face value. You seem to think HC is some over the top egregious error. I don't know the context of her
@RKBower1 2/ comments, but assuming she said something that got badly interpreted and/or ripped out of context, I thought she did a reasonable job of explaining the central point. Apparently she said something that allowed he to be accused of wanting to TAKE the coal jobs, when she ...
@RKBower1 3/ Only said, or meant to say, that those jobs were created in a time and context that is moving on, is evaporating, and they will not remain as jobs much longer regardless. That seems an honest response. Compared to Trumps dithering lies it is perfect clarity.
@RKBower1 4/ So I wonder at your glee at thinking this was some great gaff? People, even Trump, are allowed to speak and to correct themselves. It works better if they happen to be believable and not a proven serial liar. I guess I am missing the point your trying to make.
@RKBower1 5/ Compare the statements in situ:Trump's are a fools wandering. The hardest hit you could come up w was "he was off a bit"...It’s paragraphs of non sequiturs & nonsense. Regardless of agree/disagree at least you must(?) acknowledge that HC's is at least readable & comprehendible
